A.Shankar v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 16.09.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY A.Shankar ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector Chengalpet District, Collectorate Gst Road, Chengalpet 603 001.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Chengalpet Collectorate, Chengalpet

3. Tahsildar Chengalpet Taluk Office, Gst Road, Chengalpet

4. The Commissioner Chegalpet Municipality, Gst Road, Chengalpattu

5. Sriram

6. Devaki

7. Munian

8. Babu ... Respondents 1/7

Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, Directing the 2nd respondent to dispose the appeal petition in Na Ka No. 1783/22/B1 dated 02.03.2023 within a time frame that may be fixed by this honourable Court. For Petitioner : Mr.T.D.Mohan Ram For Respondent : Mr.D.Ravichander, SGP for R1 to R3

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed to direct the 2nd respondent to dispose the appeal petition in Na Ka No. 1783/22/B1 dated 02.03.2023 within a time frame that may be fixed by this honourable Court.

2. Mr.D.Ravichander, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3.

3. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2/7

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case, the petitioner's grandfather was absolute owner of the subject property. After his demise in the year 1940, the petitioner's father was in possession and enjoyment of the subject property. Under these circumstances, the petitioner's father lodged a complaint before the 4th respondent that one Neela and her sons are trying to get sketch and site plan of the subject property. On 30.08.1988, the said Neela and her sons have filed a suit in OS.No.582 of 1988 before the District Munsif Court, Chengalpattu for declaration and permanent injunction, however, the said suit was dismissed.

5. He would further submit that on 17.11.1998, the 4th respondent had excavated few feet in the petitioner's land without any prior notice. Against the said excavation, a representation was made by the petitioner before the 4th respondent, however, the same was not considered till date. Thereafter, the petitioner verified the revenue records of the subject property, whereby he came to know that the said revenue records were fraudulently transferred in the name of aforesaid Neela. Hence, a representation dated 16.10.2021 was made by the petitioner before the 3rd 3/7

respondent for cancellation of patta issued in the name of Neela. Thereafter, he made another representation dated 16.06.2022 before the 1st respondent and 4th respondent for the very same request. After conducting enquiry, the said representation was rejected vide order dated 02.03.2023. Aggrieved over the said order, an appeal was filed by the petitioner on 12.04.2023. However, the said appeal was not disposed of till date. Hence, this petition.

6. In reply, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would request this Court to grant 8 weeks time to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.

8. In the case on hand, initially, the petitioner's grandfather was the 4/7

absolute owner of the subject property and after his demise, the petitioner's father was in possession and enjoyment of the said property. Under these circumstances, on 17.11.1998, the 4th respondent had excavated few feet in the petitioner's land without any prior notice. Hence, the petitioner verified the revenue records of the subject property, whereby he came to know that the said revenue records were fraudulently transferred in the name of one Neela. Thereafter, he made a representation dated 16.06.2022 before the 1st respondent and 4th respondent for cancellation of patta issued in the name of said Neela. After conducting enquiry, the said representation was rejected vide order dated 02.03.2023. Aggrieved over the said order, an appeal was filed by the petitioner on 12.04.2023. However, the said appeal was not disposed of till date.

9. In view of the above, this Court directs the 2nd respondent to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner and dispose of the same, on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5/7

10. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No cost.

16.09.2025 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No nsa To

1. The District Collector Chengalpet District, Collectorate Gst Road, Chengalpet 603 001.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Chengalpet Collectorate, Chengalpet

3. Tahsildar Chengalpet Taluk Office, Gst Road, Chengalpet

4. The Commissioner Chegalpet Municipality, Gst Road, Chengalpattu 6/7

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., nsa 16.09.2025 7/7